5549 
B77c 


Brissenden 
Causes  of  labor  Turnover 


A 

A 

0 

0 

JD 

1 

1 

O 

1 

> 

4 

2 

1 

^^^^  ^ 

0 

-1 

6 

THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


BY  PAUL  F.  BRISSENDEN 
AND  EMIL  FRANKEL 


A  Reprint  from 

ADMINISTRAnON 

The  Journal  of  Business 
Analysis  ana  Control 

for  November,  1921 


UNIVERSITY  of  CALIFORNIA 

AT 

LOS  ANGELKS 
UBRARY 


NEW  YORK 

THE  RONALD  PRESS  COMPANY 

1921 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


BY  PAUL  F.  BRISSENDEN*  AND  EMIL  FRANKELf 


THE  reasons  for  employees  leaving 
the  service  of  an  industrial  estab- 
lishment may  be  traced  back  either  to 
purely  voluntary  action  on  their  part, 
generally  caused  by  dissatisfaction 
with  the  prevailing  conditions  of 
employment,  or  to  action  initiated  by 
the  employer  and  due  either  to  cur- 
tailment of  industrial  activities  or  to 
dissatisfaction  with  the  services  of 
certain  of  his  employees.  Separations 
occurring  on  the  employee's  own  initia- 
tive are  referred  to  in  this  article  as 
voluntary  separations  or  quits;  and 
those  resulting  from  the  affirmative 
action  of  the  employer  are  referred  to 
as  lay-offs  or  discharges,  as  the  circum- 
stances indicate.  In  attempting  to 
get  some  conception  of  the  relative 
responsibility  of  the  various  influences 
bearing  upon  the  mobility  of  labor  it  is 
highly  important  to  give  some  special 
consideration  to  each  of  these  three 
types  of  separations.  In  the  figures 
presented  here  on  the  nature  of  sepa- 
rations, "quits"  are  taken  to  include 
all  voluntary  separations,  including 
withdrawals  due  to  death,  marriage, 
etc. 

Discharges  nearly  always  mean  dis- 
missal "for  cause,"  which  presupposes 
some  form  of  incapacity  for  the  work 
or  at  least  what  is  believed  to  be  some 
defect  in  the  character  of  the  employee. 
Under  lay-offs  are  grouped  those  who 
are  "let  out"  either  temporarily  or 
permanently  whether  because  of  the 
completion  of  the  job  or  because  of 
shortage  of  the  particular  work  at 
which  the  laid-off  employee  was  en- 

*  Lecturer  on  Economics,  School  of  Business,  Colum- 
bia University,  New  York  City. 

t  Secretary  and  Director  of  the  Research  Bureau  of 
the  Baltimore  Federation  of  Clothing  Manufacturers. 


gaged.  Lay-offs  are  not  voluntary 
separations  and  have  nothing  to  do 
with  the  character  of  the  employee. 
Lay-offs,  moreover,  seldom  are  made 
for  a  definite  length  of  time  and  a  large 
proportion  of  laid-off  employees,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  never  return  to  the 
same  establishment  from  which  they 
were  laid  off. 

The  figures  presented  in  this  article 
are  based  upon  the  results  of  extensive 
investigations  of  labor  turnover  made 
by  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Labor 
Statistics.  The  Bureau's  inquiries  in- 
cluded (1)  a  pre-war  inquiry  made  in 
1915  and  1916,  and  reporting  in  a 
general  way  the  extent  of  turnover 
during  the  five-year  period  1910-1915 
and,  in  more  detail  for  the  years  1913 
and  1914,  not  only  the  causes  and 
extent  of  it,  but  also  the  efforts  that 
were  being  made  to  reduce  it;  and  (2) 
a  war-time  investigation  made  in  1918, 
resulting  in  an  intensive  report  of  the 
turnover  situation  for  the  12-month 
period  ended  May  31,  1918.  By  the 
use  of  material  secured  by  correspond- 
ence, some  of  the  data  from  these 
field  investigations  were  brought  down 
to  January  1,  1920.  The  returns  from 
the  two  inquiries  cover  upwards  of  260 
industrial  establishments,  employing 
over  500,000  workers,  in  17  of  the  most 
important  industrial  states.^ 


II 

The  relative  extent  to  which  separa- 
tions take  place  under  the  three  sets  of 
circumstances  (i.e.,  specified  as  quits, 

•  For  an  official  summary  of  the  results  of  these  in- 
vestigations, see  the  writers'  article  on  "Mobility  of 
Labor  in  American  Industry,"  10  Monthiu  Labor  Review 
1342-1362  (June,  1920). 


13269 


ADMINISTRATION 


Vol.  II 
No.     6 


m 

ti 

< 

w 

>^ 

^ 

n 

o 

2; 

> 

< 

no 

w 

1— 1 

H-; 

05 

l-H 

m 

W 

l-H 

M 

(?o 

>- 

n 

>H 

J 

< 

S 

a 

o 

?; 

|s< 

Q 

^ 

o 

W 

z 

Q 

H 

C 

H 

^ 

P 

14 

o* 

an 

>" 

w 

en 

•z 

Lh 

o 

1 

_] 

o^ 

o 

l-H 

> 

H 

o 

D3 

« 

;>< 

O 

f^ 

\^ 

o 

Q 

H 

!? 

•< 

<• 

k3 

M 

> 

c: 

D 

J 

a 

U 

o 

^ 

00    I— t 


a  ro 

U  a 
J  o  z 

OK;? 

H  C  2 

1H 


O  5  * 

o  <  g- 

a-  u  u 

a  <  s: 

a  J  o 


u.  z, 
o  u 


W 


fq  m 'I  rt  (N  ■*  O 

If;  cc  o  cc  o  "S"  ro 


r-l  lO  ®  00  OS  T)<  00 


0<C  CDUJOMr^ 

CC  ^  O  CC  O  CD  lO 


•1  CO  •*  •«< -^  cs  o 


'I"  (N  t^  Tj<  r»  CD  CO 

•-' 00  lO  CO  CO  CO  cc 


00 1^  00  ^  ic  o  o 

O  CO  I'l  C2  CD  ■      " 


r-icO"     m 


CD  CD  CO  O  "O -H  -Ji 
CO  O  -r  t^  X  C^  CO 


>-•  "tl  b- 00  00  lO  05 


CI -<  OO  OS  >o  C^  Ol 

.-1  CO  t^  CD  00  "C  o 


CD  CO  !-•  O  ".O  CO  cq 
— I IM  ■>)•  CO  M  CO 


CO  r^  CO  CO  •o  ■»»<  CO 

t^  r- (M  IM  05  00  o 


(N>nt^co  — t^c 


t»COOW5QOOOO 
i-iWCOiSWO 


O  •-<  N  CO  -r  "3  I'- 
0>  0>  0>  O)  O  0>  OS 


1 

0 

1^   =3 

iM  rt  T«<  CO  OS  CO  OS 

CO 

3   OS 

00 1^  t~  t^  •*  CO  t^ 

t» 

Q 

>m 

m 

Z 

o 

H 

■>; 

b: 

■>: 

ic 

03 

coocot^^ooo 

..H 

.J 

<3 

■< 

hJ 

H 

O 

H 

b 

0 

Id 

t3 

■< 

0) 

Id 

03 

.a 

iCOSOt^OCO'* 

CO 

,-1  r-H  (N  rH  C-1  ^  t-1 

fH 

« 

2 

Q 

■*Ov  •*  o>  N  t  rn 

« 

i-oo  ov  fooo  moo 

H 

^-S 

rH  CO  OS  lO  o  ■*  ■* 

» 

1 

0  2 

CO  CD  CO  o  •*  CO  •* 

00 

o 

3   S 

:3& 

^ 

b: 

►^w 

H 

M 

a 

.2 

o 

^ 

ft 

to 

a 

m 

(N  OS  CO  O  "O -H  Tf 

>-| 

>> 

OOOrtM wrt 

'-' 

d 

i-I 

0 

fe 

« 

Ph 

u 

(- 

s 

< 

to 

« 

1— r~  OS  ■*  t^  OS  ici 

o 

j= 

rtrt  rtlNf^ON 

Q 

0 

O 

00  lO  OS  "O  o  ■*  o 

•^ 

to 

CO  OS  O  CO  t~  CD  OS 

IN 

s 

rH^                ,-1 

—1 

< 

b: 

■< 

u 

>< 

^ 

;    ;    ;    ;    ;    ;oo 

T 

1 

H 

O  •-<  (N  CO  ■*  "O  t^ 

OS  OS  OS  OS  OS  OS  OS 

r-»  rH  l-H  i-t  .-«.-<  .-( 

1 

Nwber 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


lay-'^,•ffs,  or  discharges)  or  the  extent  to 
which  accessions  (hirings)  have  to  be 
made,  ih  indicated  in  this  paper  by  the 
"rate  [of  discharge,  (total)  separation, 
lay-off,  etc  ]  per  full-year  worker." 
The  "full-year  worker"  is  one  regu- 
larly employed  tlie  year  round.  Thus, 
if  a  concern  employs  500  men  con- 
tinuously for  twelve  months  and  800 
additional  men  for  six  months  only, 
the  number  of  equivalent  full-year 
workers  would  be  900.  Eight  hundred 
men  working  six  months,  obviously, 
are  the  equivalent  of  400  men  working 
a  full  year.  [For  the  purposes  of  this 
inquiry,  the  "full-year  worker"  is 
taken  to  be  one  employed  3000  hours 
(300  ten-hour  days)  during  the  year.] 
In  Table  1,  for  example,  the  "number 
of  full-year  workers"  is  obtained  by 
dividing  the  number  of  labor  hours 
(obtained  from  factory  clock  or  attend- 
ance records)  by  3000.  The  rates  are 
then  computed  by  dividing  the  num- 
ber of  changes  of  whatever  sort  (dis- 
.  charges,  lay-offs,  etc.)  by  the  number  of 
4  full-year  workers.  Thus,  in  1017- 
^^  1918,  the  employees  of  the  establish- 
ments studied  left  voluntarily  at  the 
rate  of  1.44  for  each  regularly  employed 
-?  worker.  In  the  same  period  the  rate 
j  of  total  separation  was  1.83.  It  should 
be  noted  here  that  many  employers 
I  and  employment  managers  use  the 
expression  "percentage  of  turnover," 
nearly  always  signifying  by  that  phrase 
the  number  of  separations  per  hundred 
employees.  It  will  be  evident  at  once 
that  the  (total)  separation  rates  given 
in  these  pages  may  be  read  directly 
as  "turnover  percentages"  simply  by 
omitting  the  decimal  point.  Thus, 
a  separation  rate  of  1.83  is  equivalent 
to  "turnover  percentage"  of  183.^ 
In  Table  1,  opposite  page,  are  given 

•  A  more  detailed  discussion  of  this  method  of  com- 
puting labor  turnover  will  be  found  in  an  article  by 
P.  F.  Briseenden  on  "The  Measurement  of  Labor  Mo- 
bility" 28  Journal  of  Political  Economy  441-476  (June, 
1920). 


the  number,  rate  per  full-year  worker, 
and  the  percentage  distribution  of  all 
separations,  of  employees  discharged, 
laid  oft",  and  leaving  voluntarily.  Fig- 
ures are  shown  for  each  year  from  1910 
to  1915  inclusive  and  for  the  12-month 
period  ending  May  31,  1918. 

The  arresting  fact  shown  in  the  fol- 
lowing rate  and  percentage  distribution 
figures  is  that  the  great  bulk  of  all 
separations  today,  as  in  1910,  is  due  to 
voluntary  leaving.  It  also  appears 
from  these  figures  that  periods  of  indus- 
trial prosperity  are  reflected  in  rela- 
tively low,  and  periods  of  depression 
in  relatively  high,  proportions  of  lay- 
offs to  total  separations,  and  that  the 
lay-off  rate  is  the  most  sensitive  of  the 
three  separation  rates  to  changing 
industrial  conditions.  Thus,  in  1914, 
when  the  ratio  of  quits  to  total  sep- 
arations was  lower  than  at  any  other 
time  during  the  period  covered  by  the 
figures,  the  proportion  of  lay-offs  was 
higher  than  at  any  other  time,  con- 
stituting nearly  one-third  (31  per  cent) 
of  all  separations,  while  in  the  imme- 
diately preceding  year  1913  lay-offs 
made  up  only  7  per  cent  of  all  separa- 
tions. The  rate  figures  indicate  that 
it  is  not  alone  the  proportion  but  also 
the  actual  rate  of  lay-off  which  is  thus 
affected  by  business  activity  and 
depression,  the  lay-off  rate  for  1913 
being  .10,  a  relatively  low  figure,  and 
for  1914,  .25  per  full-year  worker,  which 
is  an  exceedingly  high  rate  for  lay- 
offs. 

The  discharge  rate  is  evidently 
subject  to  less  extreme  fluctuations 
than  the  lay-off  rate  and  it  makes  up 
from  year  to  year  a  more  constant 
proportion  of  the  total  separations. 
There  appears,  moreover,  to  be  a 
rather  definite  relation  between  the 
accession  and  discharge  rates  due, 
possibly,  to  the  process  of  selection 
which  goes  on  when  new  workers  are 
taken     on     in     large    numbers.     The 


4 


ADMrNISTRATION 


over 
9 


t" 


Table  2.    Trend  of  Accession  and  of  Classified  Separation  RatesCiN  a 
IMiDDLE  Western  Metal  Products  Manufacturing  Plant,  by  Months, 

FROM  1912  TO  1919^ 


Year 

Ended — 


Average 
Number  of 
FulltYear 

Workers 


Moving  Aknual  Rate,  Per  Full-Year  Wo^.ker*  of- 


Quitting 


Lav-o  ff 


Discharge 


(Total) 
Separation 


Accession 


December  31,  1912 

January  31,  1913.. 

February  28 

March  30 

April  30 

May  31 

June  30 

July  31 

August  31 

September  30 

October  31 

November  30 

December  31 

January  31,  1914.  . 

February  28 

March  30 

April  30 

May  31 

June  30 

July  31 

August  31 

September  30 

October  31 

November  30 

December  31 

January  31,  1915.. 

February  28 

March  30 

April  30 

May  31 

June  30 

July  31 

August  31 

September  30 

October  31 

November  30 

December  31 

January  31,  1910.. . 

P'ebruary  29 

March  30 

April  30 

May  31 

June  30 

July  31 


1088 

1114 
1138 
1158 
1174 
1185 
1214 
1241 
1245 
1248 
1258 
1264 
1262 

1259 
1262 
1267 
1276 
1277 
1293 
1299 
1293 
1279 
1260 
1252 
1234 

1217 
1197 
1176 
1152 
1136 
1088 
1053 
1049 
1050 
1050 
1047 
1047 

1062 
1091 

nil 

1128 
1152 
1188 
1225 


1.23 

1.28 
1.31 
1.24 
1.21 
1.21 
1.28 


1.29 
1.27 
1.26 
1.24 
1.21 
1.14 

1.07 
1.01 
.96 
.86 
.75 
.64 
.61 
.51 
.49 
.46 
.45 
.44 

.42 
.41 
.39 
.39 
.39 
.36 
.38 
.42 
.44 
.46 
.50 
.54 

.76 
.92 
1.17 
1.49 
1  80 
2.00 
2.17 


.43 

.40 
.41 
.42 
.41 
.42 
.27 
.44 
.46 
.46 
.49 
.48 
.47 

.47 
.47 
.47 
.49 
.53 
.50 
.64 
.77 
.80 
.79 
.80 
.81 

.81 
.81 
.81 
.79 
.75 
.79 
.53 
.38 
.36 
.34 
.32 
.31 

.32 
.31 
.30 
.29 
.29 
.18 
.13 


.25 

.26 
.25 
.25 
.25 
.24 
.24 
.24 
.24 
.24 
.26 
.26 
.25 

.24 
.24 

.24 
.22 
.22 
.22 
.22 
.21 
.20 
.18 
.18 
.16 

.16 
.15 
.12 
.12 
.11 
.09 
.07 
.07 
.07 
.07 
.05 
.05 

.07 
.09 
.11 
.11 
.12 
.14 
.16 


1. 90' 

1.93* 
1.97* 
1.91* 
1.88* 
1.88* 
1.80* 
1.97* 
1.98* 
1.96* 
1.99* 

1-95* 
1.87 

1.78 

1-73 

1.67* 

1-57* 

1.50* 

1.36* 

1.48* 

1.50 

1.49 

1-43 
1.44 
1.42 

1-39 
1.38 

1-33 

1.30 

1.24 

1.24 

•99 

.87 

.87 

.86 

.86 

.91* 

1.14* 
1.32* 
1.58* 
1.89* 
2.21* 
2.32* 
2-47* 


(.06) 

(.05) 
{■03) 


■  11) 
.16) 
■17) 
.18) 
.26) 


.26) 
.26) 
.29) 
.37) 
.56) 
.28) 
■U) 
■11) 
.10) 
.13) 


2.20 

2.28 
2.22 
2.14 
2.08 
2.09 
2.18 
2.05 
2.04 
2.02 
2.04 
1.96 
1.81* 

1.73* 

1.70* 

1.71 

1.60 

1.53 

1.51 

1.49 

1.39* 

1.33* 

1.26* 

1.26* 

1.16* 

1.17* 

1.12* 

1.07* 

1.01* 

.87* 

.68* 

.71* 

.73* 

.76* 

.76* 

.73* 

1.00 

1.31 
1.60 
1.78 
2.08 
2.43 
2.70 
2.76 


November 
19  2  1 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


Table  2.  Trend  of  Accession  and  of  Classified  Separation  Rates  in  a 
Middle  Western  Metal  Products  Manufacturing  Plant,  by  Months, 
from  1912  TO  1919^ — (Continued) 


Year 
Ended — 


August  31 

September  30 .  .  . 

October  31 

November  30 .  .  . 
December  31 ...  . 

January  31,  1917 

February  28 

March  30 

April  30 

May  31 

June  30 

July  31 

August  31 

September  30 .  .  . 

October  31 

November  30 .  .  . 
December  31 .  .  . 

January  31,  1918 
February  28 ...  . 

March  30 

April  30 

May  31 

June  30 

July  31 

August  31 

September  30 .  .  . 

October  31 

November  30 .  .  . 
December  31 .  .  . 

January  31,  1919 

February  28 

March  30 

April  30 


AVEK.^GE 

Number  of 
Full- Year 
vvohkers 


1249 
1281 
1314 
13j5 
1392 

1406 
1413 
1433 
1456 
14G3 
1466 
1489 
1515 
1536 
1563 
1588 
1606 

1625 
1634 
1637 
1636 
1651 
1641 
1645 
1652 
1654 
1642 
1591 
1560 

1547 
1530 
1512 
1475 


Moving  Annual  Rate,  Per  Full- Year  Worker'  of — 


Quitting 


2.35 

2.52 
2.67 

2.77 
2.88 

2.86 

2.85 


3.02 
3.03 
3.04 
2.95 

2.87 


2.70 
2.67 
2.56 

2.47 


Lay-off 


.12 
.10 
.10 
.09 
.09 

.08 
.08 
.07 
.07 
.08 
.06 
.03 
.03 
.03 
.04 
.04 
.06 

.06 
.06 
.06 
.07 
.07 
.07 
.06 
.07 
.07 
.46 
.51 
.49 

.49 
.54 
.56 
.67 


Discharge 


.18 
.19 
.20 
.21 
.21 

.20 
.20 
.20 
.20 
.20 
.20 
.19 
.18 
.19 
.19 
.20 
.20 

.20 
.18 
.17 
.17 
.17 
.16 
.16 
.17 
.17 
.17 
.16 
.17 

.19 
.20 

.22 


(Total) 
Separation 


2.65* 
2.8l* 

2.97* 
3-o8* 
3.18* 

3-15* 
3.12* 
3.10* 
3.06* 
3 -06* 
3-05* 
3.11* 
3-23* 
3-35* 
3-37* 
3.36* 
3-33* 

3.28* 
3.28* 
3-27* 
319* 
310* 

3-05 

2.95* 

2.86* 

2.84* 

3.28 

3-34 

3-33 


(.03) 


(47) 
{.£6) 
(.07) 


3-37* 

341  (-07) 

3-34  i-lS) 

3-38  (.^7) 


Accession 


2.95 
3.09 
3.32 
3.60 
3.45 

3.25 
3.20 
3.25 
3.21 
3.15 
3.15 
3.36 
3.55 
3.69 
3.68 
3.57 
3.49 

3.45 


36 

30 

29 

13 

02* 

09 

90 

86 

81* 

08* 


3.26* 

3.40 
3.34* 
3.21* 
3.01 


•  Adapted  by  permission  from  an  article  by  P.  F.  Brissenden  on  "The  Measurement  of  Labor  Mobility," 
28  Journal  of  Political  Economy,  454  (June,  1920). 

'These  are  "Bmoothed"  rates  derived  (by  the  method  of  "moving  averages")  from  the  actual  rates  for  each 
separate  month,  which  latter,  in  turn,  were  computed  by  dividing  the  actual  number  of  labor  changes  of  each 
particular  kind  that  occurred  during  each  month  by  the  number  of  full-year  (i.e.,  3000-hour)  workers  employed 
during  that  month. 

*  Those  rates  of  (total)  separation  which  are  identical  with  the  rate  of  replacement  are  marked  with  asterisks.  In 
these  cases  all  of  the  separations  are  immediately  (or  very  soon)  replaced.  The  unmarked  (total)  separation  rates 
contain  a  small  proportion  (indicated  by  the  labor  curtailment  rate  shown  in  parenthesis)  of  separations  which  are 
not  replaced  for  a  considerable  period  of  time,  if  at  all.  The  reason  that  they  are  not  replaced  is,  obviously,  that 
they  are  brought  about  by  a  more  or  less  permanent  reduction  of  the  work-force. 


6 


ADMINISTRATION 


Vol.  II 
No.     5 


consequence  of  the  stimulating  efiFect 
of  business  prosperity  in  boosting  the 
voluntary  leaving  rates  may  be  seen 
in  the  high  rates  of  total  separation  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  the  lay-off  rates 
are  relatively  low.  In  periods  of 
depression  both  the  rates  and  the  pro- 
portions of  lay-ofiF  and  discharge  are 
larger  than  in  periods  of  prosperity. 
This  is  due  to  the  fact  that  when  de- 
pression sets  in  there  are  unusually 
large  numbers  laid  off  and  employees 
are  discharged  more  freely  than  would 
be  the  case  when  labor  is  m-gently 
needed. 

The  influence  of  the  prevailing  indus- 
trial conditions  not  only  upon  the 
separation  rate  as  a  whole  but  more 
specifically  upon  the  three  t^'pes  of 
separation — quitting,  lay-off,  and  dis- 
charge, which  make  up  this  rate — is 
shown  in  Table  2,  which  gives  the 
trend,  from  1912  to  1919,  of  accession 
(hiring)  and  classified  separation  rates 
in  a  middle  western  metal  products 
manufacturing  plant.  This  trend,  in 
so  far  as  the  separation  rates  are  con- 
cerned, is  shown  graphically  in  the 
chart  on  page  658. 

Perhaps  the  most  striking  fact 
brought  out  by  this  chart  is  the  very 
close  way  in  which  the  quitting  rate 
parallels  the  separation  rate,  the  mar- 
gin being  relatively  wide  in  periods  of 
depression  and  relatively  narrow  in 
periods  of  great  industrial  activity. 
At  the  period  at  which  the  separation 
rate  generally  declines  the  lay-off  rate 
at  first  shows  a  decided  upward  trend 
but  the  discharge  rate  declines  even 
more  rapidly  than  the  separation  rate 
as  a  whole.  In  tiie  period  of  increasing 
industrial  activity,  esi)ocially  during 
the  war  period,  the  discharge  rate  runs 
along  at  about  the  same  relatively  low 
level,  while  the  lay-off  rate  steadily 
declines,  reaching  its  lowest  ])oint  at  a 
period  which  marks  the  greatest  activ- 
ity in  this  i)lant. 


Ill 

The  form  of  the  lay-off  rate  curve  in 
the  early  part  of  the  7-year  period 
shows  that  it  was  the  great  increase  in 
the  number  of  men  laid  off  in  the  latter 
part  of  1914  that  raised  the  separation 
rate  during  that  time  so  considerably 
above  the  accession  rate.  This  shows 
how  inaccurate  the  separation  curve 
would  be  if  taken  to  measure  "turn- 
over " — unless  that  term  is  to  be  used  in 
reference  to  something  entirely  differ- 
ent from  the  amount  of  change  in- 
volved in  maintenance,  that  is  to  say — 
replacement.  Almost  the  whole  mar- 
gin, in  this  part  of  the  period,  between 
the  separation  and  accession  rates  is 
due  to  increased  lay-offs,  i.e.,  to  a 
(more  or  less)  permanent  decrease  in 
the  size  of  the  standard  working  force. 
Remarkable  reductions  took  place 
during  the  first  three-and-a-half  years, 
in  both  the  quitting  and  discharge 
rates.  When  the  war  began  in  Europe 
this  establishment  had,  apparently, 
gone  a  long  way  toward  the  elimina- 
tion of  discharges  as  a  factor  in  turn- 
over. In  the  three  years  from  1912  to 
1915,  it  reduced  its  rate  of  discharge 
from  .25  to  .05  per  full-year  worker,  or 
80  per  cent.  But  during  the  war 
period  from  December  31,  1915,  to 
April  30,  1919,  the  discharge  rate  in- 
creased 400  per  cent.  The  most 
important  pre-war  reduction  is,  of 
course,  in  the  quitting  rate,  because 
the  quitters  are  responsible  for  the  bulk 
of  the  turnover.  This  company's 
quitting  rate  went  down  from  1.23  in 
January,  1912,  to  .36  in  June,  1915,  a 
decline  of  71  per  cent.  But  the  quit- 
ting rate  increased  357  per  cent  be- 
tween December  31,  1915,  and  April 
30,  1919.  It  is  quite  evident,  as  has 
been  pointed  out,  that  it  is  the  quitting 
rate  which  primarily  determines  the 
total  separation  rate. 

The  disturbing  effect  of  war  condi- 


November 
19  2  1 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


tions  is  very  evident.  Both  accession 
and  separation  rates  had  risen  in  1918 
to  points  far  above  the  high  points  of 
the  1912-1915  period.  An  examina- 
tion of  the  accession  rate  and  the 
different  separation  rates  (shown  in 
Table  2)  indicates  that  the  war  pushed 
all  rates  except  the  lay-off  rate  well 
above  the  remarkably  low  points 
reached  in  1915.  Worse  yet,  the  chart 
shows  that  it  pushed  all  except  the 
lay-off  and  discharge  rates  back  to  a 
point  even  higher  than  the  maximum 
rates  of  1912,  so  that  total  separation 
and  accession  rates  and  the  replace- 
ment rate,  which  in  this  case  is  identical 


with  the  separation  rate,  rose  to  points 
never  before  reached  within  the  period 
covered  by  the  figures  reported.  It  is 
interesting  to  note  the  effect  of  the  war 
on  the  lay-off  rate.  During  the  period 
1912-1915  it  was  reduced  28  per  cent. 
War  conditions  apparently  greatly 
accelerated  this  reduction  and  showed 
a  lay-off  rate  of  .07  per  full-year  worker 
for  the  year  ending  May  31,  1918,  as 
compared  with  .31  for  the  year  1915 — a 
reduction  of  77  per  cent.  But  in  the 
latter  part  of  1918,  the  lay-oflF  rate 
began  to  rise  and  the  rate  for  the  year 
ending  April  30,  1919,  stood  at  .67,  the 
highest  it  had  been  since  1915.     De- 


Table  3.  Number  of  Establishments  in  Which  Classified  Proportions  of  the 
Total  Separations  are  Attributable,  Respectively,  to  Discharge,  Lay-off, 
Entry  into  Miutary  Service,  and  Voluntary  Quitting,  1913-14  and  1917-18 


Number  of  Establishments 

Percentages 
OF  Total 

Having  Classified 

Percentages  of  the  Total 

Separations  Due  to 

Employees  Having — 

Percentage 
OF  Total 

Number  of  Estab- 
lishments Having 
Classified  Percent- 
ages of  the  Total 

Separations 

Separations 

Separations  Due  to 

Been 

Been 

Entered 

Employees  Having 

Dis- 
charged 

Laid 
OflF 

Military 
Service 

Quit 

1913-14 

5  or  less 

6 

8 

40  or  less 

13 

Over  5  to  10 

7 

10 

Over  40  to  50 

11 

"     10  to  15 

13 

6 

"      50  to  60 

12 

"     15  to  20 

6 

4 

"      60  to  70 

7 

"     20  to  25 

6 

2 

"      70  to  80 

11 

"     25  to  30 

9 

"      80  to  90 

9 

"     30 

19 

18 

"      90  to  100 

Total 

3 

Total 

66 

48 

66 

1917-18 

6  or  less 

24 
39 

34 
15 

43 
49 

40  or  less 

3 

Over  5  to  10 

Over  40  to  50 

4 

"     10  to  15 

22 

6 

5 

"     50  to  60 

6 

"     15  to  20 

13 

1 

7 

"     60  to  70 

18 

"     20  to  25 

5 

2 

1 

"     70  to  80 

31 

"     25  to  30 

3 

5 

"     80  to  90 

37 

"     30 

1 

5 

"     90  to  100 

Total 

9 

Total 

107       j         68 

105 

108 

ADMINISTRATION 


Vol.  II 
No.     6 


o 
> 

H 


o 

^ 

K 

U 

H 

s;; 

W 

00 

fc< 

1 

t^ 

f^ 

O 

o 

Q 

1— 1 

< 

Q 

12; 

Q 

'S< 

H 

t— 1 

O 

CO 

<! 

r> 

S 

U 

2 

^ 

§ 

H 

o 

§ 

a. 

H 

S 

^ 


n 
■< 
H 


£    !« 


•^    CO 

(5 


J  O  Z 

■<'T'   < 

f,W  JO 
O  «  D 
^§§ 


aim 
«  Jj   OS 

a  J  o 


Ex.  I 

O  B 

„  *  o 

*  J  h 

o  5  u 

I?  H  a 

b  00 


5 
5'= 


cw^oo^-c•^'oo 


^^  rt      lO 


.-icO<N(NOWO>-* 


o_50  IN  »  00     in  t- 


NtOIN  COrt       Tf<0 


O0O~.  CCOOOO-H 


•^O-'Jit^'O-HMM 


p;  « 


:0  a  £ 


_  __  _  —      ^     j^  ,^ 


I-ITJ-  l-CCC  l-H 


-HOOroOCOOOiNffiCTi'-i'Hiftoo 

O'^M'^'-iiNrocDOiMooair^ 

O  00  ;D  CO  00  tO_'^_5D_CT(N  CO_t-^(N 

o>iN  ro.-iTO  "-leo 


05t>-c£M'*'mM(NU5CCiO>0'^ 
irtrt  T}<  O  lO  O -^  to  O  CO  «o 


050(M 

IN  00  M  CO -H  ■*  lO  N  IC 

■>)'t- 

50000       CD       C<50 

o 

rHM            K5       N'<J<' 

t^h-Ttii.'^oicoo'i'oocOTfira 

Oi'^O5C<HN>O00iO0CO3'*.-it~ 


.-IOOM'<1<       CCINCDOO 


o:ojooioroicc<irooocDiNoo>o 

CS-a-Ot^-^OOCDiOINCOOOCOIN 

t>-_io  o_iN  -^.tM  Tf  cD_ic  oc  ror-_ 

OO'r-Tc^"       rt  a  t^ lO  r^ '-^  06 r' cc 
CD  M        r-l        -H        (NIN 


cOt^Tjo-'IN'-iOr^MiOMO'* 


cS.I^=i« 


3h: 


3  =  a, 


^■5  i*£ 


C^    u 


:.c  0)  1/ 4/ « 
sSCtoH  — 

-,   3  ••  c 

i  «■-       -n 


■    <»    Ml 

:'§1 


c3  3 


a> 


i;   m   °J   is 

O-.i  -  — j:c::=: 

^  t^    C  ^^    -1    C    rt 


3-3  a 


_,<t!  2 


'5  S'^  '* 

;    -    oC  C        ^  ♦J 


£  c3 


:■=  c « 


h  «  ea  o 
3  4„^ 


5  c-g'n: 

*  4*  o   H 


.S-o 


3.£ 


C   3 

o  ^  «  oa  1) 


0,  *.^ 

c  c 

22 


■~  E  o 
i.-.5| 

la-i    h  3 


bO 


November 
19  2  1 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


9 


^■1 


•^  ^  ix  V 


2  t- 


^1 


gco 


QJ3 


i-i<Nrt(N(NrtrtM^ 


00>00       .-H'fl'O.-i 


■-IMCOOOM— ICDIOC0005-* 
(NC<5i-i^lM.-i.-i<NO'-i"-"-i«3 


U3  c3 


O  CO -H  00  Tfi  (N  ,-i(N 


WINMt>-int>.t»O0 


•  a  R 


•3  "3 


:^l 


-a  bc 


•"H"^  c 

•S—  °^   jU  oj 

3   ='    '^  ^    V. 

a.-  ^        o 

O  £-g'c"5 


He's 


>. 

c  g  fc  O 

ii  sooa 

^  .2  ^  .£  ^  *j  c  ^ 


3 
CO 


spite  the  increased  war  demand  for 
labor  the  discharge  rate  increased  from 
.05  in  1915  to  .17  in  1918,  an  increase  of 
229  per  cent.  It  has  continued  to  rise, 
and  stood  at  .25  for  the  year  ending 
April  30,  1919. 

IV 

The  proportions  of  the  total  separa- 
tions in  industrial  establishments  due 
to  discharge,  lay-ofiF,  and  (voluntary) 
quitting  in  the  period  1913-1914,  and 
to  discharge,  lay-off,  entry  into  mili- 
tary service,  and  quitting  in  1917-1918, 
are  shown  in  Table  3  (page  655). 

It  is  evident  that  the  war  period 
brought  about  a  considerable  decrease 
in  the  proportion  of  discharges  and  in 
the  number  of  establishments  having  a 
heavy  proportion  of  separations  due  to 
discharges.  The  war  period  had  the 
same  effect  upon  lay-offs,  but  on  the 
contrary,  it  brought  about  a  great 
increase  in  the  number  of  establish- 
ments having  a  heavy  proportion  of 
separations  due  to  voluntary  leaving. 
The  mobility-rate  figures  of  Table  3 
for  66  establishments  reporting  in 
1914  and  107  establishments  reporting 
in  1918  indicate  that  discharges  in 
1918  made  up  over  30  per  cent  of  all 
separations  in  less  than  1  per  cent  of 
the  establishments  reporting,  whereas 
in  1914  they  bulked  that  large  in 
nearly  one-third  of  the  establishments 
reporting.  As  to  lay-offs,  the  same 
figures  demonstrate  that  in  1918  they 
constituted  over  30  per  cent  of  all 
separations  in  less  than  8  per  cent  of 
the  establishments  reporting,  but  in 
1914  they  made  up  over  30  per  cent  of 
all  separations  in  over  37  per  cent  of 
the  establishments.  Voluntary  quits 
in  1918  made  up  over  80  per  cent  of  all 
separations  in  nearly  half  of  the  estab- 
lishments reporting,  while  in  1914  they 
constituted  this  large  a  proportion  in 
less  than  one-fifth  of  the  concerns 
reporting. 


10 


ADMINISTRATION 


Vol.  II 
No.     5 


November 
19  2  1 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


11 


How  the  relative  proportions  of 
discharges  and  voluntary  separations 
have  changed  during  the  last  few  years 
may  be  seen  from  the  figures  for  a  large 
machine  tool  manufacturing  establish- 
ment. The  percentage  of  employees 
leaving  voluntarily,  as  against  the 
total  number  of  separations,  for  each 
of   the   three   years   ending   June    30, 

1916,  1917,  and  1918,  and  for  the 
three-months'  period,  July  to  Septem- 
ber, 1918,  inclusive,  for  the  day  force, 
were  80,  81,  86,  and  92,  respectively. 
The  percentages  of  voluntary  separa- 
tions for  the  night  force,  for  the  same 
periods,  were  77,  82,  91,  and  96  per 
cent,  respectively.  The  ratio  of  dis- 
charged employees  for  the  day  force 
for  the  years  ending  June  30,    1916, 

1917,  and  1918,  and  for  the  three- 
month    period,    July    to    September, 

1918,  inclusive,  were  20,  19,  14,  and  8 
per  cent  respectively.  During  the 
same  periods  the  night  force  showed 
the  following  percentages  of  discharges : 
23, 18,  9,  and  5,  respectively.  Quitting 
became  more  frequent;  firing  much 
less  frequent. 

In  Table  4,  the  subdivided  separa- 
tion rates  are  classified  according  to 
the  various  industry  groups  covered  in 
the  two  investigations. 

These  figures  bring  out  some  rather 
important  and  significant  facts  with 
regard  to  various  industries.  It  is 
evident,  for  example,  that  mercantile 
establishments  had  the  minimum  dis- 
charge rate  in  1914  and  printing  and 
publishing  plants  in  1918;  the  minimum 
lay-off  rate  in  1914  was  in  clothing  and 
textiles  and  in  1918  in  printing  and 
publishing;  and  the  minimum  quitting 
rate  in  1914  was  in  the  street  railway 
industry  and  in  1918  in  the  telephone 
service.  The  maximum  discharge  rate 
was  in  the  automobile  industry  in 
1914  and  in  the  slaughtering  and  meat- 
packing industry  in  1918.  The  maxi- 
mum lay-off  rate  in  1914  was  in  the 


automobile  industry  and  in  1918  in 
mercantile  establishments,  and  the 
maximum  quitting  rate  was  in  leather 
and  rubber  goods  in  1914  and  in  chem- 
ical industries  in  1918.  The  figures 
show,  furthermore,  that  in  1914  in  the 
automobile  group  discharges  and  lay- 
offs made  up  over  half  of  all  separa- 
tions but  that  by  1918  they  had  been 
reduced  to  less  than  one-fourth  of 
all  separations.  In  the  miscellaneous 
metal  products  industries,  discharges, 
and  lay-offs  constituted  in  1914  nearly 
one-third  of  all  separations  but  by  1918 
they  had  been  cut  down  to  about  one- 
eighth  of  the  total  separations.  In 
mercantile  establishments,  on  the  other 
hand,  discharges  and  lay-offs  bulk 
about  as  heavily  among  the  separations 
in  the  earlier  as  in  the  later  period, 
making  up  nearly  half  of  all  separations 
both  then  and  now. 


An  attempt  to  establish  some  rela- 
tion between  the  particular  type  of 
separations  and  the  relative  skill  of 
the  separating  employee  is  made  in 
Table  5  in  which  are  classified  the 
returns  from  22  establishments  which 
reported  mobility  figures  for  skilled 
and  unskilled  employees  separately. 

The  degree  of  occupational  training 
and  skill  possessed  by  the  employees 
appears  to  make  little  or  no  difference 
in  the  proportion  of  quits,  discharges, 
and  lay-offs  in  the  total  number  of 
separations.  The  percentage  distribu- 
tion figures  show  that  76  per  cent 
of  the  skilled  employees  and  72  per 
cent  of  the  unskilled  employees  who 
left,  did  so  voluntarily;  15  per  cent  of 
the  skilled  and  19  per  cent  of  the  un- 
skilled were  discharged,  and  10  per 
cent  of  the  skilled  and  9  per  cent  of  the 
unskilled  employees  leaving  were  laid 
off.  The  situation  is  quite  different, 
however,    with   regard   to   the   actuaj 


12 


ADMINISTRATION 


Vol.  II 
No.     5 


Table  5.    Comparison  of  Sepahation  Rates  of  Skilled  and  Unskilled  Employees 
Leaving  Voluntarily,   Discharged,   and  Laid  Off  During  One  Year 

(1913,  1914,  and  1915;  22  establishments  reporting) 


Separations  During  Year 

Number 

Rate  Per 
Full -Year  Worker' 

Percentage 
Distribution 

Skilled 

Unskilled 

Skilled 

UnskiUed 

Skilled 

Unskilled 

All  Separations: 

Quits 

16,484 

12,451 

2,432 

1,601 

22,251 

16,093 

4,171 

1,987 

.66 
.51 
.09 
.06 

1. 41 

1.03 

.27 
.12 

100 
76 
15 
10 

100 

72 

Discharges 

19 

Lay-offs 

9 

I  Based  on  74,199,000  skilled-labor  hours  and  46,980,000  unskilled-labor  hours  put  in  during  year  in  the  22  estab- 
lishments. 


rate  of  separation,  the  figures  indicat- 
ing conclusively  that  the  lay-off,  dis- 
charge, and  quitting  rates,  and,  of 
course,  the  total  separation  rate,  are 
each  much  higher  for  unskilled  than  for 
skilled  workers,  the  total  separation 
rate  being  .66  for  skilled  and  1.41  for 
unskilled  workers.  The  subdivided 
separation  rates  show  about  the  same 
relation  between  skilled  and  unskilled 
so  that  it  would  appear  that  skilled 
workers  are  about  twice  as  stable  as 
semiskilled  and  unskilled  ones. 

VI 

In  Table  6  the  relation  between  the 
type  of  separation  and  the  size  of 
establishment  is  shown  on  the  basis  of 
the  mobility  figures  of  the  66  estab- 
li.shments  reporting  in  1913-1914  and 
108  establishments  reporting  in  1917- 
1918. 

In  the  period  1913-1914  there  is 
observable  quite  a  marked  decrease  in 
the  discharge  and  lay-off  rates  as  the 
size  of  the  establishment  increases. 
The  explanation  for  this  may  be  sought 
in  the  fact  that  the  large-size  estab- 
lishments were  less  seriously  affected 


by  the  industrial  depression  which 
made  itself  felt  during  that  period. 
The  situation  is  reversed,  however,  in 
the  period  1917-1918,  the  discharge 
and  lay-off  rates  being  slightly  higher 
in  the  larger  establishments.  In  both 
periods  the  separation  rates  as  a  whole 
show  a  slight  decrease  as  the  size  of  the 
establishment  increases. 

VII 

The  need  for  definite  and  detailed 
information  on  the  causes  of  labor 
instability  is  obvious.  In  order  to 
devise  methods  of  stabilizing  the  work 
force  and  eliminating  unnecessary 
labor  changes  it  is  quite  necessary  to 
know  the  factors  responsible  for  the 
labor  shiftings.  It  is  hardly  necessary 
to  call  attention  in  this  place  to  the 
fact  that  the  causes  of  labor  instability 
present  a  very  vast  and  complex 
problem.  It  is  obvious  that  a  de- 
termination of  these  causes,  because  of 
their  complex  nature  and  the  large 
number  of  factors  to  be  considered, 
would  necessitate  an  inquiry  of  a 
magnitude  quite  beyond  the  scope  of 
the  present  inquiry.     In  discussing  the 


November 
19  2  1 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


13 


Table  6.  Relation  Between  Size  op  Establishment  and  Type  of  Separation 
(Discharge,  Lay-off,  Entry  into  Miutary  Service,  and  Quitting)  1913-14 
AND  1917-18 


Number 
OF  Estab- 

LI8HME1«'8 

Number 

OF 

Workers 

Total 
Labor 
Hours 
(Thou- 
sands) 

Number  of  Employees  Who — 

Number  of  Emplotees 

Were 
Dis- 
charged 

Were 
Laid 
Off 

Entered 
Military 
Service 

Quit 

Total 

1913-1914 
Under  1000 

29 

29 

8 

16,097 
72.634 
77,399 

48,291 
217,902 
232,197 

5,929 

15,335 

9,646 

5,512 
18,880 
10,028 

12,014 
31.698 
46,865 

23,455 
65.913 
66.539 

1000  and  under  5000 

5000  and  over 

66 

166,130 

498,390 

30,910 

34.420 

90.577 

155,907 

1917-1918 

Under  1000 

67 

32 

9 

32,453 

69,182 

105,668 

97,359 
207,546 
317,004 

7,107 
12,952 
31,341 

3,868 
10,201 
15,764 

4,110 

8,125 

11,365 

56,414 
97,097 
122,046 

71,499 
128,375 
180,516 

1000  and  under  5000 

6000  and  over 

108 

207.303 

621,909 

51,400 

29,833 

23.600 

275,557 

380,390 

Rate,  Per  Fdll-Yeab  Worker,  of 

1913-1914 

1917-1918 

Dis- 
charge 

Lay- 
off 

Entry 

into 

Military 

Service 

Quitting 

(Total) 
Separa- 
tions 

Dis- 
charge 

Lay- 
off 

Entry 

into 

Military 

Service 

Quitting 

(Total) 
Separa- 
tions 

Under  1000. .  .  . 
1000  and  under 

5000 

5000  and  over.. 

.37 

.21 
.13 

.34 

.26 
.13 

.75 

.44 
.61 

1.46 

.91 
.87 

.22 

.19 
.30 

.12 

.15 
.15 

.13 

.12 
.11 

1.74 

1.40 
1.16 

2.21 

1.86 
1.72 

All    establish- 
ments   

.19 

.21 

.55 

•95 

.25 

.14 

.11 

1.33 

1.83 

underlying  reasons  for  separations  we 
are  disregarding  here  the  separations 
from  service  due  to  purely  industrial 
conditions  and  fluctuations  in  produc- 
tion, that  is  to  say,  forced  separations, 
or  lay-offs,  the  occurrence  of  which 
depends  upon  whether  or  not  a  par- 
ticular job  has  been  finished  or  whether 
or  not  industrial  depression  has  set  in. 
No  attempt  is  made  here  to  discuss 
that  part  of  the  labor  shifting  which  is 
due  to  maladjustment  of  labor  supply 
and  demand  caused  by  an  unorganized 
labor  market,  by  a  defective  system  of 
labor  distribution,  or  by  maladjust- 
ment in  the  matter  of  wage  levels  for 


similar  work  in  different  localities,  etc. 
In  view,  therefore,  of  the  complexity 
of  the  problem  and  the  lack  of  informa- 
tion on  the  subject  it  is  intended  to 
discuss  here,  not  the  causes  of  mobility 
that  are  primarily  inherent  in  the 
industrial  community  situation,  but 
the  more  personal  causes  of  labor 
shifting  as  those  causes  find  expression 
in  the  separating  employee  and  as  they 
have  been  classified  by  individual 
employers.  It  is  recognized,  of  course, 
that  the  non-industrial  and  personal 
causes  are  inextricably  interwoven 
with  the  conditions  created  by  the 
prevailing  industrial  situation. 


14 


ADMINISTRATION 


Vol.  II 
No.     5 


In  their  eflForts  to  stabilize  the  labor 
force  a  number  of  firms  have  made 
attempts  to  discover  the  causes  of 
instability  and  more  particularly  to 
find  out  the  immediate,  or  precipitat- 
ing, causes  for  separations  from  service. 
They  have  done  this  on  the  assumption 
that  if  it  were  feasible  to  ascertain  the 
fundamental  reasons  why  men  leave 
their  employ,  it  would  be  possible, 
through  the  tabulation  and  analysis 
of  those  reasons  to  show  the  real  causes 
of  instability.  It  was  felt,  moreover, 
that  if  it  were  practicable  to  ascertain 
the  real  reasons  for  employees  leaving 
it  might  then  be  relatively  easy  to 
develop  a  record  which  would  be  of 
considerable  value  in  the  solution  of 
the  employment  problem  in  the  indi- 
vidual establishments  concerned,  and 
so  point  the  way  toward  greater  sta- 
bility. 

Even  in  this  individual  method  of 
ascertaining  the  causes  for  labor  insta- 
bility there  are  serious  diflSculties  to 
be  overcome.  Employment  managers 
and  others  in  charge  of  the  work  force 
essay  to  interview  an  employee  who  is 
about  to  leave  of  his  own  accord.  This 
interview  is  held,  of  course,  before  the 
employee  actually  severs  his  connec- 
tion with  the  firm.  At  the  interview 
the  employer  or  his  agent  tries  to  secure 
a  frank  and  truthful  statement  from 
the  employee  regarding  the  actual 
reasons  which  are  impelling  him  to 
leave.  Employers  point  out,  however, 
the  difficulties  involved  in  interviewing 
prospective  quitters.  They  say  that  it 
is  difficult  to  do  this  even  in  normal 
times  and  that  it  was  especially  difficult 
during  the  war  period  because  of  the 
more  independent  attitude  assumed  by 
the  workers.  It  is  generally  found 
that  men  leaving  service  do  not  like  to 
l)e  questioned  too  closely  regarding 
their  reasons  for  leaving  and  often 
I)lainly  resent  such  inquiries.  It  is 
claimed  that  in  many  cases  they  give 


some  fictitious  excuse  rather  than  a 
substantial  reason  and  when  pressed 
advance  the  most  plausible  reason 
they  can  get  away  with.  From  the 
standpoint  of  the  worker  it  is  perhaps 
not  difficult  to  understand  his  reluc- 
tance to  give  full  information  regarding 
his  reasons  for  leaving. 

Such  knowledge  in  the  possession  of 
the  employer  might  be  disadvanta- 
geous to  the  employee  in  his  search  for  a 
new  job  and  it  might  in  other  ways 
have  the  effect  of  restricting  his  free- 
dom of  movement.  The  employee 
will  have  observed  that  nearly  all 
employment  departments  keep  careful 
records  of  employees'  past  history  and 
that  employers  generally  keep  each 
other  informed  about  the  movements 
of  former  employees.  To  the  diffi- 
culties of  ascertaining  from  individual 
employees  the  reasons  for  their  leaving 
there  must  be  added  the  difficulty  of 
analyzing  and  classifying  the  results 
obtained.  It  has  been  the  experience 
of  men  interviewing  prospective  quit- 
ters that  even  where  the  reason  for 
quitting  has  been  obtained  it  has  not 
always  been  easy  to  reduce  to  a  single 
classifiable  category  the  manifold 
motives  which  may  have  animated  the 
individual  in  his  desire  to  change  jobs. 
Many  employment  managers  believe 
that  only  in  the  case  of  discharges  can 
the  causes  of  separation  really  be 
definitely  known.  This  is  obviously 
because  action  in  the  case  of  discharge 
proceeds  from  the  management  and 
the  employee  has  nothing  to  say  about 
it. 

VIII 

For  the  reasons  given  in  the  pre- 
ceding j)aragraph,  the  figures  on  causes 
for  quitting  which  are  presented  below 
cannot  be  regarded  as  more  than  an 
indication  of  existing  conditions,  al- 
though emi)loyers  who  have  kept  such 
figures  have  expressed  the  opinion  that 


November 
19  2  1 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


15 


in  most  cases  they  point  definitely 
toward  certain  existing  maladjust- 
ments and  to  particular  causes  that 
need  to  be  attacked.  In  Table  7  are 
given  the  classified  assigned  reasons 
for  the  voluntary  separation  and  the 
causes  for  the  discharge  of  nearly 
10,000  employees  in  six  metal  trades 


in  one  form  or  another  enters  into  most 
of  the  specified  reasons  for  leaving. 
For  those  classified  under  "better 
jobs"  the  question  of  wages  is  not 
supposed  to  have  been  the  prime  mo- 
live  in  making  the  change,  but  the 
governing  causes  for  leaving  were  said 
to  have  been  more  desirable  work,  the 


Table  7.  Reasons  Advanced  for  Voluntary  Separation  from  Services  of  8140 
Employees  and  Causes  for  Discharge  of  1439  Employees,  in  6  Metal  Trades 
Establishments 


Reason  for  Voluntary 
Separation 

Cases 

Cause  of  Discharge 

Cases 

Num- 
ber 

Per 
cent 

Num- 
ber 

Per 
cent 

Wages — Dissatisfied    with 

Wage  Rate,  Etc 

Obtained    Better    Job    or 

2001 
984 

410 
674 

218 

461 
453 
131 

58 
737 

2013 

24.6 
12.1 

5.0 
8.3 

2.7 

6.7 
5.6 
1.6 

.7 
9.0 

24.7 

Incompetent 

Unreliable 

478 

422 

148 

66 

93 

54 

105 

73 

33.2 
29  3 

Lazy 

10.3 

Retiirnefl  to  Former  Job 

Careless 

4.6 

Nature      of      Work — Too 
Hard,      Heavy,       Wet, 
Diistv,  Dirty    

Insubordination 

Misconduct 

Trouble  breeder 

Liquor 

6.5 
3.7 
7  3 

Dissatisfied 

5.1 

Monotony 

Total 

Physical     Inability — Sick- 
ness, Injuries,  Etc 

Leaving  Town 

Return  to  School 

All  Other  Known  Reasons 
Military  Service 

Unknown — Failed  to    Re- 
port   

Total 

8140 

100.0 

1439 

100  0 

establishments.  Some  of  the  reasons 
or  causes  listed  in  a  number  of  these 
groups'. have  been  briefly  amplified. 

Dissatisfaction  with  wages  is  evi- 
dently the  largest  single  reason  for 
voluntary  separation,  and  no  doubt  it 
is  safe  to  assume  that  the  wage  motive 

•  a  more  detailfd  and  scientific  classification  was  im- 
possible because  of  the  necessity  for  making  a  combina- 
tion of  the  records  of  the  various  establishmcnta,  each  of 
which  put  a  somewhat  different  interpretation  upon  their 
recorded  reasoni  for  leaving  or  cau~c8  for  discharge. 


location  of  the  plant,  etc.  Under 
"nature  of  work"  are  classed  a  con- 
siderable number  of  quitters  who  mider 
the  stimulus  of  higher  wages  or  the 
"  work-or-fight"  order  entered  mechan- 
ical occupations,  but  not  being  accus- 
tomed to  the  grease,  dirt,  noise,  etc., 
inherent  in  the  nature  of  the  work, 
constantly  have  shifted  in  the  hope  of 
finding  more  pleasant  work.  It  has 
been  stated  that  the  relative  ease  with 


16 


ADMINISTRATION 


Vol.  II 
No.     5 


which  a  job  could  be  secured  during 
the  war  period  made  workers  more 
ready  to  throw  up  jobs  which  seemed 
undesirable  to  them  but  which  in 
normal  times  they  would  be  reluctant 
to  leave. 

For  those  classified  under  "dissatis- 
fied" no  one  specific  reason  seems  to 
have  been  applicable.  Employment 
managers  believe  that  the  question  of 
wages  or  work  is  seldom  a  factor  with 
this  t\T5e  of  labor,  but  that  its  desire  to 
shift  is  due  largely  to  an  inherent 
instability  and  that  persons  of  this 
type  are  unable  to  assign  any  specific  or 
logical  reason  for  their  desire  to  change. 
Employment  managers  believe  these 
considerations  to  be  equally  true  of  a 
large  number  of  those  who  failed  to 
report  before  leaving.  It  is  said  that 
the  number  of  employees  leaving  in 
this  manner  during  the  war  period 
was  greater  than  at  any  previous  time. 
This  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  the 
shortage  of  help  necessitated  the  em- 
ployment of  the  so-called  "floater," 
a  type  of  workman  which  in  normal 
times  would  not  be  employed  at  all  by 
these  concerns.  It  has  been  found  to 
be  characteristic  of  employees  of  this 
type  that  they  never  .stay  on  a  job 
for  more  than  a  brief  period,  soon 
dropping  out,  without  giving  notice, 
to  accept  work  elsewhere. 

Under  "incompetent"  employment 
managers  have  classified  certain  work- 
ers who  after  a  trial  have  been  found 
to  be  unfit  or  imsuited  for  the  work  for 
which  they  were  hired.  It  was  pointed 
out  that  althotigh  those  persons  were 
willing  to  work  they  were  found  to  l)e 
incapable  of  learning  the  work  and 
were  responsible  for  a  great  deal  of 
spoiled  work.  This  group  also  in- 
cluded workers  who  misre])resente(l 
their  occupational  skill  when  taken  on, 
as,  for  exainj)h',  l)y  using  certain 
acquirefl  phrases  that  would  indicate 
familiarity    with    the    kind    of    work 


required  of  them.  The  number  dis- 
charged for  incompetency,  it  is  as- 
serted, increased  during  the  war  period 
because  the  urgent  need  of  men  made 
careful  selection  less  possible.  The 
management  has  classified  those  as 
"unreliable"  whose  attendance  record 
was  bad,  who  were  habitually  late  in 
the  morning,  or  who  were  prone  to 
lay  off  too  frequently  and  for  trivial 
reasons.  A  good  many  of  those  dis- 
charged for  being  unreliable  are  sus- 
pected by  employment  managers  of 
having  looked  for  jobs,  and  possibly  of 
having  tried  out  jobs,  in  other  plants, 
while  absent. 

Employment  managers  have  classi- 
fied as  "trouble  breeders"  those  who 
have  attempted  to  create  dissatisfac- 
tion among  their  fellow  workers  by 
urging  or  intimidating  them  to  con- 
certed action  of  some  sort,  as  for 
instance,  the  unionizing  of  the  shop  or 
the  presentation  of  demands  for  wage 
increases,  revision  of  piece  or  premium 
rates,  etc.  The  relatively  large  number 
discharged  for  being  "trouble  breeders" 
may,  perhaps,  be  explained  by  the 
fact  that  it  is  the  policy  of  the  estab- 
lishments from  which  the  figures  of  the 
above  table  have  been  secured  to  deal 
with  their  industrial  workers  only  as 
individuals. 

IX 

A  somewhat  detailed  record  of  the 
number  of  people  who  left  the  employ 
of  a  large  mail  order  house  during  1917 
has  been  compiled  and  is  given  in 
Table  8. 

During  the  year  1917  there  occurred 
in  this  establishment  22,700  separa- 
tions. Of  this  number  5204  or  22,9 
])er  cent,  were  due  to  reduction  of 
force,  98'J  or  4.3  per  cent  due  to  en- 
trance into  military  service.  Of  the 
remaining  separations,  with  the  causes 
of  which  we  are  here  specifically  con- 
cerned, 13,664,  or  60.2  per  cent  of  all, 


November 
19  2  1 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


17 


Table  8.  Reasons  Advanced  for  Voluntary  Separation  from  Service  of  13,664 
Employees  and  Causes  for  Discharge  op  2849  Employees,  During  1917,  in  a 
Mail  Order  House 


Cases 

Cases 

Reasons  for  Voluntary 
Separation 

Cause  for 
Discharge 

Num- 
ber 

Per 

cent 

Num- 
ber 

Per 

cent 

Other  Positions: 

More    Promising    Posi- 

2080 
1109 

268 

44 

48 

62 

2047 

229 

823 

755 
221 
273 
134 

107 

93 

67 

92 

565 

810 

2527 
1310 

15.2 
8.1 

2.0 

.3 

.4 

.5 

15.0 

1.7 

6.0 

5.5 
1.6 
2.0 
1.0 

.8 

.7 

.5 

.7 

4.1 

5.9 

18.5 
9.6 

Unsatisfactory : 

Too  Slow 

776 
352 
255 

309 
56 

473 

327 

79 

44 

13 

8 

157 

27  2 

tion      

Indifference 

Carelessness 

Irregular      Attend- 
ance   

12  4 

Better  Salary 

9  0 

Former  Position  and  Re- 
turn to  Trade 

10  8 

Going  into  Business. .  .  . 

To  Learn  Trade 

Position  Nearer  Home. 
Leaving  City 

References 

Dishonesty       (Sus- 
pected of  Pilfer- 
ing, etc.) 

Insubordination 

Drinking 

2.0 
16  6 

To  Marry 

11  5 

On  Account  of  Health. .  .  . 

2.8 

Dissatisfied : 

Fighting 

1.5 

With    Working    Condi- 
tions   

Financial  DiflBculties . 

Enemy  Aliens 

Other  Causes 

Total 

.5 
3 

With  Salary 

5  5 

Work  Too  Hard 

Resented  Criticism .... 

Refused    to    Be   Trans- 
ferred   

Refused         Temporary 
Work 

Did  Not  Like  Supervi- 
sion   

Distance  Too  Great .... 

To  Go  To  School 

To  Stay  At  Home 

No  Reason : 

Worked  Less  Than  Two 

W^eeks 

Failed  to  Report .... 

Worked      More      Than 

Two  Weeks 

Failed  to  Report  .... 

Total 

13,664 

100.0 

2849 

100  0 

were  voluntary,  and  2849,  or  12.6  per 
cent  of  all,  were  due  to  discharges. 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  figures  of 
Table  8  that  of  the  total  number  of 
voluntary    separations    about    25    per 


cent  resulted  from  employees  having 
obtained  either  more  promising  posi- 
tions or  positions  which  offered  higher 
wages.  The  number  "leaving  city" 
seems    to    represent    a    considerable 


18 


ADMINISTRATION 


Vol.  II 
No.     5 


Table  9.  Numbeb,  Per  Cent  Distribution,  and  Annual  Rate  Per  Full-Year 
Worker  of  Employees  Hired  and  Rehired  and  of  Those  Leaving  for  Specified 
Reasons  in  Year  Ending  October  31,  1918 

(Department  Store) 


Number 

Per  Cent 
Distribution 

Rate  Per 

Full- Year 

Worker  1 

Accessions :  - 

Hired  New        

908 
223 

80 
20 

1.01 

Rehired 

.25 

Total  Accessions 

1131 

100 

1.26 

Separations: 
Discharged — 

Incompetent    

21 

13 

8 

8 
5 
4 

2 
1 

34 
21 
13 

13 
8 
6 
3 

2 

.02 

Misconduct 

.01 

Careless 

.01 

Unreliable 

.01 

Trouble  breeder 

.01 

Dishonest 

3 

Lazy 

3 

Insubordinate 

S 

Total  discharged 

62 

100 

.07 

Laid  off 

431 

.48 

Left  voluntarily: 

Wages 

228 

154 

135 

127 

117 

75 

48 

45 

39 

24 

22 

61 

21 

14 

13 

12 

11 

7 

4 

4 

4 

2 

2 

6 

25 

Family  Moving 

17 

Other  Position 

15 

School 

14 

Ill  Health 

13 

Needcfl  at  Home 

08 

Di.ssati.sficd 

05 

Vacation;  Needed  Rest 

05 

War 

04 

Marriage  (Women) 

03 

Work  Too  Heavy  or  Disagreeable 

All  OMkt  Reasons* 

.02 
.07 

Total  Ixft  \'oliintariIv 

1075 

100 

1   18 

Total  Separations 

1568 

I  73 

•  Hiuwd  on  ■Innclard  working  force  of  890  ''ll-ycar  workers. 
'  For  nine-  rrionthii  indinK  Ort.  31,  1018. 

•  I>iiii  than   fKJ.I 

•  "  l^nvinir  city,"  3.3;  "going  intocMcntial  work,"  0;  "RoinK  into  business,"  3;  on  account  of  "housing  conditions, 
2;  rraitoDs  unknown,  17. 


November 
19  2  1 


CAUSES  OF  LABOR  TURNOVER 


19 


proportion  of  the  total  number  leaving. 
It  is  very  doubtful,  however,  whether 
this  number  really  left  the  city;  it  is 
quite  likely  that  in  the  majority  of  the 
cases  it  was  only  a  proffered  excuse. 
Those  who  were  dissatisfied  for  various 
reasons  number  12.8  per  cent  of  the 
total.  A  significant  commentary  on 
the  whole  stability  situation  in  this 
establishment  is  implicit  in  the  rather 
large  number  of  persons  who  simply 
dropped  out  of  service  without  giving 
any  notice  of  leaving  either  in  advance 
or  subsequently.  Nearly  30  per  cent 
of  the  total  number  leaving  volun- 
tarily left  without  giving  notice. 

Among  the  establishments  whose 
labor  turnover  experience  was  exam- 
ined in  some  detail  by  the  Bureau  of 
Labor  Statistics  was  one  of  the  largest 
department  stores  on  the  Pacific  coast. 
This  store  went  to  no  little  trouble  to 
ascertain  the  reasons  for  employees 
quitting  and  to  tabulate  not  only  the 
number  quitting  for  various  assigned 
reasons  but  also  the  number  discharged 
for  specified  cause,  assigned,  naturally, 
by  the  company.  This  concern  also 
kept  account  of  the  proportion  of  those 
rehired  to  new  accessions.  A  full 
analysis  of  these  records  is  given  in  a 
special  report*  published  by  the  Bureau 
of  Labor  Statistics  on  the  turnover 
experience  of  this  department  store. 
The  tabular  summary  which  appears 
in  that  report  is  herewith  reproduced, 
with  some  modification,  in  Table  9  on 
page  665. 

•"Employment  Policy  and  Labor  Stability  in  a 
Pacific  Coast  Department  Store,"  by  P.  F.  Brissenden,  9 
Monthly  Labor  Review  1399  (November,  1919). 


The  only  classification  of  the  acces- 
sions is  into  "hired  new"  and  "re- 
hired." During  the  nine  months  for 
which  data  were  available,  it  appears 
that  20  per  cent  of  all  of  those  hired 
had  been  in  the  company's  service  at 
some  previous  time.  Among  the  rea- 
sons assigned  for  discharge  the  most 
frequent  seems  to  have  been  incom- 
petency, "misconduct,"  carelessness, 
and  unreliability.  Among  those  leav- 
ing voluntarily  the  most  prevalent 
reasons  given  are  dissatisfaction  with 
wages,  desire  to  take  another  position 
(which  in  some  cases  is  desired  because 
of  the  higher  wage  offered)  family 
moving  out  of  town,  going  to  school, 
and  ill  health.  Using  the  last  column 
as  a  basis,  it  is  evident  that  during  the 
year  reported,  for  each  100  full-time 
workers  employed  there  were  101 
entering  the  store  as  new  employees, 
and,  in  addition,  25  former  employees 
rehired.  Turning  to  the  separations, 
which  are  our  primary  concern  here, 
it  appears  that,  for  every  hundred 
full-time  workers  employed,  there  were 
173  separations;  7  of  these  were  dis- 
charges, 48  were  lay-offs  (on  account  of 
lack  of  work)  and  118  were  quits. 
Scrutinizing  the  latter  more  closely, 
we  find  that  25,  for  every  hundred 
employed,  quit  on  account  of  unsatis- 
factory wages,  17  quit  because  the 
family  was  moving,  15  on  account  of 
another  job,  14  to  enter  school,  13 
because  of  ill  health,  8  because  needed 
at  home,  5  because  "dissatisfied,"  the 
same  number  for  a  vacation  (without 
pay)  or  a  needed  rest,  and  4  for  war 
work. 


113269 


I 


m 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


■ri' 


mR   1^^^^ 


REr:[:\vAL 

LQ  URL 

RENEWAC    ..Art  1  t^iQ7e 

LDyjBL     WAJl  151375. 


Uf.. 


^  WAY  84 
4UN22197B 


.CitC 


\^^ 


^\)6^C 


RENEWAL      MARJk-(W 
LO  URL   ,  ^,3Th 

Form  L9-32m-8,'57(,C8680s4)444 


i?,    APR  18 

1976  REC'D  lO-URC 


s. 


i  lOboi 
RECD  LD-URL 


MAY  1 2  198Z 


RENEWAL    ...^  .  .,  ,,. -^ 
LDURL      i(^(f5-M 


UW^^ 


•OKNIA 


LOS  ANGELES 
LIBRARY 


THE  LI13RAKY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


PAMPHLET  BINDER 


Syracuse,  N.   Y. 
Stockton.  Colif. 


3   1158  00730  3109 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    001  114210    6 


«^- ., *, ' ■■''mv^m  'm^:mi M 


